On Sun, Jan 03, 2016 at 06:53:34PM +0100, Clément Bœsch wrote: > On Sun, Jan 03, 2016 at 05:43:26PM +0000, Derek Buitenhuis wrote: > > On 1/3/2016 5:33 PM, Clément Bœsch wrote: > > > + return (0x6996966996696996ULL >> (x & 63) ^ (x>>7) ^ (x>>6)) & 1; > > > > I mean, I see how it works, but it's incredibly non-obvious without the > > patch context (table removal). > > > > Any suggestion? Maybe a comment? Or you prefer the 32 lines table of 256 > bytes to store 256 redundant bits of information? > > The name of the function gives the context here, if you look up the web > for "bit parity" you'll get what you are looking for. I'm not sure the > table is much more obvious about what's this parity is all about. >
Now that I think a bit about, I could just do return av_popcount(x) & 1... -- Clément B.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
